Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 16 Apr 2009 09:14:42 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: Fix quilt merge error in acpi-cpufreq.c |
| |
* H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote: > >> > >> At least then it wouldn't break up the narrative, and it would > >> kind of fit with all the other "tagged" lines. > > > > Yeah, that makes sense. > > Actually, there is one good thing about this. One of the things > we've found useful is to have the maintainer add or edit Impact: > lines. Putting them with the tags would make it more clear who did > the impact assessment.
Ah, indeed - good point. There two other good things about moving the impact line to the signoff section:
- We can actually add it every time - even if it repeats bits of the subject line which would look weird if it was in the second line. Right now with the impact line in a prominent place i often feel reluctant to add an impact line when the subject line is good enough to describe the expected risk/impact of a change.
- I can update my scripts to warn when i sign off on something with no impact line. I.e. the "dont forget to assess impact" step becomes even harder to flunk.
/me likes.
We then also need a good Documentation/impact-tag.txt description about it, and list the principles and a few good and bad examples. Would you like to write it up?
Ingo
| |